Abstract
The aim was to assess the outcomes of different redo endovascular interventions in
terms of wound healing and limb salvage within 6 months. From April 2024 to October
2024, a prospective clinical study was carried out on 56 patients who presented with
chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) after previous peripheral endovascular intervention
6 months to 1 year earlier. Regarding technical success, restored linear blood flow
from common femoral artery (CFA) to foot was higher in stenting and drug-coated balloon
(DCB) than plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) (p value = 0.032 and 0.033 respectively). Restoration of pedal pulse was statistically
higher in DCB than in stenting (p value = 0.006) and higher in stenting than POBA (p value = 0.003). Wound healing at time frame of 3 months after the operation was statistically
higher in DCB than POBA and stenting (p value = 0.002 and 0.007 respectively) and higher in stenting than POPA (p value = 0.033). Regarding amputation-free survival, above ankle amputation within
6 months of follow-up was lower in stenting and DCB than POBA (p value = 0.016 and 0.018 respectively) and there was no statistical difference between
stenting and DCB (p value = 0.166). Stenting and DCBs have demonstrated a superior ability than POBA
to restore linear blood flow from the CFA to the foot, leading to better amputation-free
survival rates, including a decreased likelihood of above ankle amputation within
the first 6 months of follow-up. When it comes to wound healing and sustaining limb-based
patency, DCB angioplasty has shown better performance compared with stenting and POBA.
Keywords
redo - endovascular - angioplasty - infra-inguinal - CLTI - DCB - POPA
